Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Terry Hancock <hancock AT anansispaceworks.com>]

drew Roberts wrote:
> Should the unit of packaging be the object and should we allow mixing of 
> copyleft and non-Free objects to make a non-Free program? I think most 
> copyleft type Free Software people would say no.

You would be wrong if you mean, for example, combining non-free game
objects with a free game "engine" that plays the resulting game. Most
free software advocates think this is perfectly okay.

There are a number of counter examples used to justify this point. For
example, if it weren't true:

1) Free license any word-processing document you create with AbiWord

2) Likewise, any document written with MS Word couldn't be
free-licensed, or you couldn't use MS Word to edit GPL or By-SA documents.

3) It would be illegal to distribute internet RFP descriptions of
protocols used by your software along with the documentation for that
software (verbatim-licensed material mixed with free-licensed)

In fact, of course, Debian does have an issue with some of these cases,
but that's because they have a goal of delivering a 100% free
distribution, not because it is a violation of free licenses (in fact or
in intent) not to.

Cheers,
Terry


-- 
Terry Hancock (hancock AT AnansiSpaceworks.com)
Anansi Spaceworks http://www.AnansiSpaceworks.com